20 STONEHILL INC. v Pana - Landlord Loses Eviction Case
Landlord's attempt to evict tenant for renting out rooms dismissed by LTB
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: September 12, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 20 Stonehill Court, Scarborough, ON M1W2Y6
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Dec 2022
Hearing Date
Sep 2023
Order Date
Oct 5, 2023
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenant because the Tenant, another occupant of the rental unit or someone the Tenant permitted in the residential complex used the rental unit or the residential complex in a manner that is inconsistent with use as a residential premises and that has caused or can be expected to cause significant damage.
Determinations
- Tenant was in possession of the rental unit on the date the application was filed
- Landlord served N7 notice of termination on August 18, 2022
- Landlord did not prove the allegations in the N7 notice
- Tenant is renting additional rooms to pay rent, not operating a short-term rental business
- Installation of locks on bedroom doors and placing insulation over kitchen entrance does not constitute serious damage
Case Study
The Landlord has not proven on a balance of probabilities the grounds for termination of the tenancy. The evidence presented by the Landlord and largely agreed to by the Tenant shows the Tenant is renting the additional rooms within the unit so that he can pay the monthly rent to the Landlord and maintain his housing. The Tenant's actions do not constitute using the rental unit for a purpose other than a residential premises, and there is no evidence of serious damage to the rental unit.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued the Tenant was operating a business by renting rooms within the unit to others since the Tenant's evidence was he has no other source of income. Landlord also argued the locks on the bedroom doors and Mr. Kilic's evidence supports the finding the Tenant uses the rental unit for short term rentals.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued he is doing nothing that the Act does not permit and that he is allowed to sleep in the dining room area if he wishes as it is his space.
Actions
Tenant rents out additional rooms in the unit to pay the monthly rent to the Landlord.
Decision Summary
The Landlord's application is dismissed.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
477
Landlord Favorable
90.6%
Tenant Favorable
4.4%
Mutual Agreement
5.0%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Lawful Rent
$1,462
Source
Similar Cases
Click to switch between case outcomes
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Goklani v Cannata
Toronto tenants' maintenance dispute against landlord dismissed by LTB
Jeff v Ferguson
Woodstock landlords awarded $35,186 in rent arrears, tenants face eviction for non-payment.
Oxford Properties Group v Benjamin
Tenant ordered to pay $22,461.70 for flood damage with conditional tenancy preservation
Sufi Properties Ltd v Nieman
Tenants ordered to pay $16,866 in rent arrears to Former Landlord after complex dispute.